A friendly word of advice to Ginger Taylor and Age of Autism’s Kim Stagliano

Courtesy of antivaccinationist Kool Aid drinker Ginger Taylor, I saw this new term for those who argue against the scientifically dubious proposition that vaccines cause autism, specifically Paul Offit:

Vaccinianity – (Vax.e.an.eh.te) n. The worship of Vaccination. The belief that Vaccine is inherently Good and therefore cannot cause damage. If damage does occur, it is not because Vaccine was bad, but because the injured party was a poor receptacle for the inherently Good Vaccine. (ie. hanna poling was hurt when she came into contact with Vaccine, not because the Vaccine was harmful, but because her DNA was not to par or because her mitochondrial disorder was to blame.) Vaccine is presumed to have rights that supersede the rights of the individual, while the human person’s rights must defer to Vaccine.

Apparently, Kim Stagliano at AoA originally coined the term. She’s even quite pleased with herself about it. Now, I’m sure that Ginger and Kim think this is a hilariously spot-on term for what they perceive to be the “religion” of their enemies, but I don’t think they know that a very similar term has been coined before by some particularly loathsome and despicable people. At least, I hope that they don’t. Indeed, I am offering this information because I do not want to see even the AoA knuckleheads get too enthusiastic about embracing a term that has echoes of an incredibly vile philosophy, as easy a target as it would give me in the future. As wrong as they are about vaccines and autism, even antivaccinationists don’t deserve that. The vile idiots who coined the similar term that I’m talking about are just that despicable, and I’d gladly give up the fun I could have using this information against Kim and Ginger because of that.

So, to Kim and Ginger, I humbly suggest one thing:

Just Google the term I’m referring to.

Take this as just a friendly word of advice to my esteemed opponents, lest they unknowingly tar themselves with a most unpleasant association. I’d hate to see them do that. From my perspective, they may deserve many other terms of opprobrium, but not that one.

No need for them to thank me, by the way. I’d do the same thing for other pseudoscientists, too, and what are friends for?